Jack Johnson in the current HW division.

He'd be a contender at best

Add modern sized goves to any of those guys and they'd look a lot smaller all of a sudden

He would actually

 

Those who say he wouldnt be 'in the top 30', can we have an explination rather than just a sentence?

 

he wouldnt be a heavyweight today.so no he wouldnt hold any belt..and wouldnt beat any top 10 (legit top 10) guys of today

 

I'm still waiting for an explination as to why he doesnt beat a top 10 Povetkin, top 10 Adamek, top 10 Chambers, Top 10 Dimitrenko, Top 10 Arreola and top 10 Kubrat Pulev, all of which are rated by the Ring

 

Well Johnson was brutally KO'd by Jess Williard (the poor mans Tyson Fury) in his prime years so it doesn't look good for him in this era.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPXB9OLrAnA"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPXB9OLrAnA[/ame]


Needless to say but from the clip he looks technically awful against the farmer turned boxer as a 27 year old Willard.

 

easily..jack johnson dosnt have the style to compete today its as simple as that..plus haye is bigger and so was adamak..i cant believe im actually having to explain this to a ****ing boxing fan...he has a primitive style along with his small size he wouldnt be of relevance..hes an atg for what he achieved not because he is considerd to be able to beat the **** out of most heavyweights..most good heavyweight from 55 onwards beat him i dont give a **** what anyone says its the truth

 

Ali was a huge tall HW at 6'2 and 210 average. Joe was a LHW carrying around 15lbs of tummy into his fights.

Julius Long KO1 Joe Louis

 

Jack Johnson was in his prime 7 years after winning the HW title? He was in his prime 13 years after making his debut?

Wlad was knocked out by the dynamite puncher and future HOF HW Ross Puritty, a guy at the time who had lost 13 times. Does that make him any less great?

Fact is, neither were in their primes when they suffered these losses. And the fact remains that both were tehnically good enough to make it competitive when fighting each other

 

Haye and Holyfield are natural HW's. Some men simply take until their mid to late 20s to fill out.

Gomez's lack of muscle fiber could easily allow for him to continue at CW until he was 40, but he added fat, as did Adamek, Chambers, Jirov, Toney, and many others.........but there's NO denying Holyfield and Haye are natural 225 lbrs. 240 lbs would be a perfect weight for David Haye if he were to ever become a boxer.

 

OMG!

We're comparing JJ with today's heavyweights now?!
Please stop with all this nonsense... Historical buffs would say he will be able to compete in this era, and the other boxfans laugh that away.
It's just guessing at this point, not much to go on, and certainly not by watching a couple of rounds from a over the hill, 40+, slightly overweight Johnson stumble against a prime Willard (who looked awful too by the way)!

Please stop with this yes/no game, cause there's no way to prove it anyway.

 

Look, it's not about size or talent. Talentwise - Johnson might be up there with the best of any era. But if you just pick him up from his prime and drop him in there here and now, he'd be completely outclassed simply because training methods have progressed by leaps and bounds in the last 50 or so years. Think of the olympics - I would venture that no record in terms of running, jumping, swimming, weightlifting, throwing etc. from the sixties (or perhaps even the eighties) still stands today. That's because training methods keep developing. If Johnson had been born in 1983 and trained all his life with modern methods, I'm sure he'd be a challenge for anyone in the current top 10. But the Johnson from around 1910? I don't think so.

 

Wlad would treat JJ in the ring like those Yanks(Great great grand father os Boxed ears) were treatening those poor fellas back in the day.:-(

 

jack johnson was 6-1 but looks more 6ft haye and adamak are 6-3 ish that is bugger.they both are alot more solid as you can clearly seefrom videos..they are all also alot ****ing faster and actually have skill and are not primitive like johnson with their style..and now your even comparing holyfield to him now you need sent back to the mother ship..his skill level and his size would stop him being relevent..you just cant seem to get it into your head that back then they fought a completly different way than now there bodys wernt as strong ect ect..are you ******ed?

 

How was Johnson not in his prime against Farm boy Willard? It was his 10th consecutive World title fight. Not to mention he fought on for another 17 years after that.
:huh

 

so what if he fought on for another 17 years? Duran fought on until he was 50! If, like most people, we consider Duran shot after Hearns destroyed him in 2 rounds, he went on for 17 years after that!

JJ may have went on for 17 years, but he was a bit part player in those years. I'm not saying he was completely shot, but he was miles past his best by then!

Like i said, explain to me how Povetkin, Arreola, Adamek etc beat him.